Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Feasibility Of A 747-8i With Short Upper Deck  
User currently offlineKaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2311 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 12638 times:

Some airlines (EK, and maybe BA and QF for the kangaroo route) want extremely long range airplanes. I know EK wanted to extend the range of the 747-8i. Would it be beneficial to have the short freighter upper deck on the 747-8i? It would decrease capacity, but cut back a lot of weight. Would the benefits be worth it?

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMPDPilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 986 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 12575 times:

I would think that it would offer some benefits and it would be a pretty cheep to do on boeings part. The less passengers would save a large amount of weight, not to mention the lower OEW. I think the big question would be if the lower passenger load maintained the economics that make the airplane useful. The CASM on a route like that has to be rather high and lowering the passenger number wouldn't help.

I have always wondered if you could order a 747-400 with a 747-400F frame. (not that they make the 400 anymore)



One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
User currently offlineJbernie From Australia, joined Jan 2007, 880 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 12567 times:

Well, given a 74x normally ends up as a freaighter at some point down the road and the extra space of the upper deck is of little benefit to a freight company... but probably wont make much of a difference at all unless there was a fuel or cargo penalty for the extra weight of the extended upper deck...

It will be interesting to see what happens, certainly there could be some potential for the smaller upper deck being a dedicated crew area.


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4700 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12253 times:



Quoting Kaitak744 (Thread starter):
Some airlines (EK, and maybe BA and QF for the kangaroo route) want extremely long range airplanes.

Never going to happen with EK and QF placing large orders for the A380 type...

BA on the other hand "maybe"...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12229 times:

I know when the 742SUD was introduced, the SUD was aerdynamically better, allowing the 747 to be flown at a slightly higher speed. For cargo operations, the SUD is not only not necessary, it also has a lower roof than the rest of the main deck. So for cargo, the SUD is not useful. But I'm not sure if the aerodynamic benefit outweighs the extra weight.


L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineBrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1286 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12195 times:

Actually I was wondering just yesterday if the 7 VIP 748i's would all be "SUD" or might not.

Any clues?



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8216 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 12095 times:



Quoting BrightCedars (Reply 5):
Any clues?

The "-I" has always been described as long upper deck. So that is our info. The VIP models are to be the Intercontinental model with the long upper deck. Unless something drastic happens, such as cancellation of the passenger model.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9842 posts, RR: 96
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 11983 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Kaitak744 (Thread starter):
Some airlines (EK, and maybe BA and QF for the kangaroo route) want extremely long range airplanes

The shorter 748 variant originally proposed would have been a much better option IMO - all the reduction in the hump does is remove capacity whithout taking as much away in terms of structural weight, compared to what would now be a shrink.

Rgds


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11965 times:

I did a quick cut & paste last yr..



User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 11935 times:

How much would the difference in floor space area be between the 77W and the 748i-short-upperdeck version?
Don't you need the long upperdeck for getting a competitive CASM?



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 608 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11706 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 6):
The "-I" has always been described as long upper deck. So that is our info. The VIP models are to be the Intercontinental model with the long upper deck. Unless something drastic happens, such as cancellation of the passenger model.

Which will allow potential sale on to airlines after VIP use


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 11488 times:



Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 9):
How much would the difference in floor space area be between the 77W and the 748i-short-upperdeck version?
Don't you need the long upperdeck for getting a competitive CASM?

That's what I was thinking. The only advantages a shortened up deck 748I might have over the standard 748I/77W would be more cargo, and more range. But in the case of the 77W, not significantly more cargo and the additional 200,000lbs of MTOW for the 748I would probably not justify it over the 77W, which is supposed to get another range improvement soon anyway.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineMascmo From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 93 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10993 times:



Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 1):
I have always wondered if you could order a 747-400 with a 747-400F frame.

There would be no windows...passengers would not appreciate that haha!  hissyfit 


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10898 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 4):
know when the 742SUD was introduced, the SUD was aerdynamically better, allowing the 747 to be flown at a slightly higher speed. For cargo operations, the SUD is not only not necessary, it also has a lower roof than the rest of the main deck. So for cargo, the SUD is not useful. But I'm not sure if the aerodynamic benefit outweighs the extra weight.

An "accidental" aerodynamic discovery by Boeing. Boeing engineers that were working on the 747SP were confused by better than expected high mach operating characterstics (near MMO, the maximum Mach operating speed), and discovered (with careful aerodynamic analysis) that the upper deck extending to just forward of the wing root created advantageous aerodynamic behaviors at high speeds. This resulted in the -200SUD and -300 series, which took advantage of this...  Smile



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10734 times:



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 13):

An "accidental" aerodynamic discovery by Boeing. Boeing engineers that were working on the 747SP were confused by better than expected high mach operating characterstics (near MMO, the maximum Mach operating speed), and discovered (with careful aerodynamic analysis) that the upper deck extending to just forward of the wing root created advantageous aerodynamic behaviors at high speeds. This resulted in the -200SUD and -300 series, which took advantage of this... Smile

Maybe this will carry over to the 747-8I and produce better than expected numbers  Smile



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6126 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10708 times:

For the routes described, there is already the A340-600 HGW, I would think.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10648 times:



Quoting Mascmo (Reply 12):

There would be no windows...passengers would not appreciate that haha!

Put a piano bar up there  Wink



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10616 times:



Quoting Aesma (Reply 15):
For the routes described, there is already the A340-600 HGW, I would think.

But the 748I would still carry a lot more people, more cargo, farther, and for cheaper.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15503 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 10501 times:



Quoting Jbernie (Reply 2):
Well, given a 74x normally ends up as a freaighter at some point down the road and the extra space of the upper deck is of little benefit to a freight company...

During the conversion process, I believe that the interior of the upper deck is shortened, to extend the high ceiling portion of the main deck cargo area. Externally, the upper deck remains the same.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 13):

Basically I believe that they found that it was an effective form of area ruling. The longer upper deck provided a smoother change in the cross sectional area of the aircraft.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 16):
Put a piano bar up there

Back to the future.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29709 posts, RR: 84
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10395 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would be surprised if the extra 2m Boeing put back into the 747-8 really made a major difference in terms of structural weight. I imagine it was done to improve the plane's economics by allowing an additional row of Business Class seats to be put in on both the main and upper deck (for a total of 11) which would have been important to customers at the time the decision was made.

Also, the extension appears to be in different places according to a graphic provided by Flight International - on the 747-8 it's forward of Door 2 and on the 747-8F it's over the frontal edge of the wing root - where Door 2 is on the 747-8.

[Edited 2009-11-20 13:48:31]

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24109 posts, RR: 23
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10288 times:



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 13):
This resulted in the -200SUD and -300 series, which took advantage of this.

Two -100SUDs (the SR short-range model) were also built for JL. I think both were sold to Orient Thai Airways in 2006.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © YK
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © K.L.Yim



User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6272 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10193 times:



Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
Two -100SUDs (the SR short-range model) were also built for JL. I think both were sold to Orient Thai Airways in 2006.

Wow, thanks for that tidbit. Never knew that  Smile

Just one question: were these factory-built as -SUD models, or were they modified after manufacture, like KLM's 200 SUDs?



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24109 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10085 times:



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 21):
Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 20):
Two -100SUDs (the SR short-range model) were also built for JL. I think both were sold to Orient Thai Airways in 2006.

Wow, thanks for that tidbit. Never knew that

Just one question: were these factory-built as -SUD models, or were they modified after manufacture, like KLM's 200 SUDs?

Factory-built as far as I know. They were the last two of the 29 747-100SRs built (17 for NH, 12 for JL). Both were delivered in 1986.


User currently offlineDennys From France, joined May 2001, 824 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9986 times:

I do hope many more orders for the 747-8i project !!!!

cheers

dennys


User currently offlineEuclid From South Africa, joined Apr 2005, 372 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9746 times:



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 21):
Just one question: were these factory-built as -SUD models, or were they modified after manufacture, like KLM's 200 SUDs?

They were factory built as SUD models.


25 Post contains links 747classic : The two (2) JL 747-100B SUD aircraft were factory built. If you take a closer look at the type certificate of the 747 this type is mentioned as separ
26 Parapente : How about putting 40 business class seats down the whole length the "attic "(1 times 1 config).Of course you would need to punch in some windows.( sor
27 KELPkid : Four words: "Certification authority evacuation requirements." Those words have killed more Boeing plans for wacky things to do with the crown space
28 Aesma : The current one, probably (it is not built yet). But we are talking about one without seats in the bump, so almost like an A340, except for the cockp
29 Jbernie : I was thinking more along the lines of... By the time a 747-8i gets sold for freighter conversion, is there any extra value in having the cargo upper
30 747classic : I did some research in my library to pinpoint the actual weight difference between a 747-8I with stretched upper deck and a 747-8I variant, with the s
31 Manfredj : Is this correct? We're talking about an airplane that is longer and (wider) in places. That's a big difference! I'm not sure I understand, you're say
32 Post contains links 747classic : On the normal 747 fuselage the upper deck ended a few feet behind the cockpit. So, on the 747-100/200/400F/400ERF series there is no noticeable area-
33 Aesma : You're right, no 3-4-3 config' on an A340, and the 748 will take back the lenght crown (until the A389 I think). What I would like to see is an idea
34 Post contains images DocLightning : Wait a minute, Keesje. (I've met him in person and he's a lovely man, but I do love giving him a hard time ). You are the one who bandies about a twi
35 Bmacleod : Looks like the 747-200 Classic, except for the engines and advanced wing structure. Won't even get to the drawing board......
36 Post contains links and images Keesje : Yes 2 yrs ago, the 2.5 engined 747 successor. If you want to position an aircraft with a real world capasity of up to 500 seats a 1.5 deck aircraft s
37 Tdscanuck : Because you'd have a major recertification effort for all the altered systems, and probably couldn't hold a common pilot rating because the view out
38 A318LRQC : What would be interesting would be a Boeing 747SP-NG-(M)-ER based on the 747-800 technology, basically an updated SP with all other required modificat
39 Stitch : The 777F already fill that role as a freighter and the 77L does as a passenger carrier.
40 DocLightning : Weren't we at the LHR meet-up last spring?
41 Thegeek : Would a 748 with cargo on the main deck and pax on the upper deck make sense? Obviously, the cargo airline would need some sort of code share with a p
42 Rangercarp : Wouldn't it make more sense to make the upper deck longer and increase the seat count?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing Completes Firm Config Of 747-8I posted Tue Nov 6 2007 09:03:01 by NYC777
Effects Of 747-8I Order By Lufthansa posted Wed Dec 6 2006 14:40:23 by CX747
B 747-400"D" Upper Deck Windows? posted Thu Sep 4 2003 07:39:30 by AV8AJET
Air France 747-200 SUD (streched Upper Deck) posted Sun Dec 3 2000 21:17:25 by L'espace18
747-8I - Use Of Upper Deck Door? posted Wed May 6 2009 07:46:42 by VirginFlyer
Boeing Sees No Interest In 747-8I Upper Deck Sleep posted Tue Oct 31 2006 20:21:24 by NYC777
Upper Deck Of 747 Freighters posted Fri Feb 3 2006 01:34:44 by Gunsontheroof
747 With Economy On Upper Deck? posted Tue Apr 20 2004 17:05:04 by Acho
The Upper Deck Of A 747 Freighter posted Sun Jun 22 2003 20:39:26 by Britair
Upper Deck Windows Of JAL 747-100 posted Thu May 15 2003 19:32:29 by Super_cheung